Jaguar Land Rover Limited v MYRTLE LIMITED (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2016] DRS 17561 (26 July 2016)

Jaguar Land Rover Limited v MYRTLE LIMITED (Summary Decision _Transfer) [2016] DRS 17561 (26 July 2016)

The domain name was found to be identical or confusingly similar to the complainant's trademark and registered in bad faith; transfer was ordered.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] DRS 17561
Parties
Complainant: Jaguar Land Rover Limited; Respondent: MYRTLE LIMITED
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
26 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision
Outcome
domain name transferred
Legal Topics
Domain Name Transfer, Trademark Infringement
Intellectual Property Internet Law Domain Name Transfer Trademark Infringement

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaguar Land Rover Limited

Complainant

MYRTLE LIMITED

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Domain Name Dispute / Summary Decision

  1. 1 whether the domain name should be transferred due to trademark infringement

Ratio Decidendi

The domain name was found to be identical or confusingly similar to the complainant's trademark and registered in bad faith; transfer was ordered.

Court Disposition

domain name transferred

Orders

  • transfer of the disputed domain name to Jaguar Land Rover Limited